Comparison Between PI and PR Current Controllers in Grid Connected PV Inverters PDF

World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Electrical, Computer, Energetic, Electronic and Communication Engineering Vol:8, No:2, 2014
Comparison between PI and PR Current Controllers

in Grid Connected PV Inverters
D. Zammit, C. Spiteri Staines, M. Apap
AbstractThis
International Science Index Vol:8, No:2, 2014 waset.org/Publication/9997375
paper presents a comparison between

Proportional Integral (PI) and Proportional Resonant (PR) current
controllers used in Grid Connected Photovoltaic (PV) Inverters. Both
simulation and experimental results will be presented. A 3kW GridConnected PV Inverter was designed and constructed for this
research.
KeywordsInverters,
Proportional-Integral
Proportional-Resonant Controller, Photovoltaic.
between PI and PR current controllers used in grid-connected

PV inverters is also presented, both by simulations and by
experimental tests.
Fig. 1 below shows a block diagram of the Grid-Connected
PV Inverter system connected to the grid through an LCL
filter.
Controller,
I. INTRODUCTION
RID-CONNECTED PV Inverter systems have become an

important power generating method and the number of
these systems connected to the grid is always increasing.
Therefore it is important to limit the harmonics generated by
these inverters to limit adverse effects on the grid power
quality. This means that the design of these inverters should
follow harmonic limits set by IEEE and European IEC
standards (IEEE 929, IEEE 1547 and IEC 61727) which
suggest limits for the current total harmonic distortion (THD)
factor and also for the magnitude of each harmonic.
The current controller can have a significant effect on the
quality of the current supplied to the grid by the PV inverter,
and therefore it is important that the controller provides a high
quality sinusoidal output with minimal distortion to avoid
creating harmonics. Two controllers which are used in currentcontrolled PV inverters are the PI controller with the grid
voltage feed-forward and the PR controller.
Comparison of the two controllers is presented and
discussed in [1]-[3] among others. A shortcoming with the PI
controller generally is that it is not able to follow a sinusoidal
reference without steady state error due to the dynamics of the
integral term. The inability to track a sinusoidal reference
causes the need to use the grid voltage as a feed-forward term
to obtain a good dynamic response by helping the controller to
try to reach steady state faster. A current controller which is
more suited to operate with sinusoidal references and does not
suffer from the above mentioned drawback is the PR
controller. The PR controller provides gain at a certain
frequency (resonant frequency) and almost no gain exists at
the other frequencies.
In this paper the design of a single phase 3kW gridconnected PV inverter is presented, which includes the design
of the LCL filter and the current control. A comparison
Daniel Zammit, Prof. Cyril Spiteri Staines, and Dr Maurice Apap are with
the Department of Industrial Electrical Power Conversion, University of
Malta, Msida, MSD 2080 (e-mail: daniel.zammit@um.edu.mt, cyril.spiteristaines@um.edu.mt, maurice.apap@um.edu.mt).
International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(2) 2014
Fig. 1 Block diagram of the Grid-Connected PV Inverter with the

LCL Filter
II. LCL FILTER AND CURRENT CONTROL

A. LCL Filter
The transfer function of the LCL filter in terms of the
inverter current Ii and the inverter voltage Ui, neglecting Rd, is:
I
1
G F ( s) = i =
U i Li s
(s 2 + [ 1
])
Lg C f
( L + Lg )
(s 2 + [ i
])
( Li Lg C f )
(1)
where, Li is the inverter side inductor

Lg is the grid side inductor
and
Cf is the filter capacitor
The resonant frequency of the filter is given by:
res =
( Li + Lg )
(2)
( Li Lg C f )
The transfer function in (1) does not include the damping

resistor Rd. The introduction of Rd in series with the capacitor
Cf increases stability and reduces resonance [4]. This method
of damping is a type of Passive Damping. Whilst there exist
other methods of passive damping and also more advanced
Active Damping methods, this particular damping method
used was considered enough for the aim and purpose of
comparing the two current controllers due to its simplicity.
The transfer function of the filter taking in consideration the
damping resistor Rd is:
221

G F (s) =
1
Li s
Ii
Ui
(s 2 + s(
Rd
[( L + L g ) Rd ]
(s 2 + s( i
Lg
(3)
) +[ 1
Li Lg
) +[
])
Lg C f
( Li + L g )
( Li Lg C f )
])
B. PI Control with Grid Voltage Feed-Forward

Fig. 2 below shows the PI current control strategy with the
grid voltage feed-forward (UG). Ii is the inverter output current
which is used as feedback, Ii* is the inverter current reference
and Ui* is the inverter voltage reference.
Fig. 2 The PI Current Control with the Grid Voltage Feed-Forward
The PI current controller GPI(s) is represented by:
G PI ( s ) = K P +
KI
s
(4)
where, KP is the Proportional Gain term and KI is the Integral

term.
GF(s) represents the LCL filter. GD(s) represents the
processing delay of the microcontroller, which is typically
equal to the time of one sample Ts and is represented by:
G D ( s) =
1
1 + sTs
(5)
C. PR Control
Fig. 3 below shows the PR current control strategy. Ii is the
inverter output current which is used as feedback, Ii* is the
inverter current reference and Ui* is the inverter voltage
reference.
determines the dynamics of the system; bandwidth, phase and

gain margins [5].
Equation (6) represents an ideal PR controller which can
give stability problems because of the infinite gain. To avoid
these problems, the PR controller can be made non-ideal by
introducing damping as shown in (7) below.
G PR ( s ) = K P + K I
s
s + 0
(7)
To perform comparison tests between the two current

control strategies, a 3kW Grid-Connected Inverter was
designed and constructed. The LCL filter was designed
following the procedure in [5], [7]. Designing for a dc-link
voltage of 358V, maximum ripple current of 20% of the grid
peak current, a switching frequency of 10kHz, filter cut-off
frequency of 2kHz and the reactive power produced by the
capacitor not to exceed 5% of rated power, the following
values of the LCL filter were obtained: Li = 1.2mH, Lg =
0.7mH, Cf = 9F and Rd = 8.
IV. PI AND PR CONTROLLER DESIGN
A. PI Controller Design
The PI controller was designed for a damping factor in the
range of 0.8 and a natural frequency in the range of 3142
rad/sec, obtaining a Kp of 4.21 and KI of 2107. The damping
factor obtained was 0.85 and the natural frequency n
obtained was 3360 rad/sec.
Fig. 4 shows the root locus plot in Matlab of the system
including the LCL filter, the processing delay, anti-aliasing
filter in the output current feedback path and the PI controller.
The root locus plot shows that the designed system is stable.
(6)
where, KP is the Proportional Gain term, KI is the Integral

Gain term and 0 is the resonant frequency.
The ideal resonant term on its own in the PR controller
provides an infinite gain at the ac frequency 0 and no phase
shift and gain at the other frequencies [5]. The KP term
III. LCL FILTER DESIGN
The PR current controller GPR(s) is represented by:
s + 2 c s + 0
where, c is the bandwidth around the ac frequency of 0.

With (7) the gain of the PR controller at the ac frequency 0
is now finite but it is still large enough to provide only a very
small steady state error. This equation also makes the
controller more easily realizable in digital systems due to their
finite precision [6].
Fig. 3 The PR Current Control
G PR ( s ) = K P + K I
2 c s
2
222

300
200
0.92
0.84
0.74
0.6
300
200
0.42
aliasing filter in the output current feedback path and the PR

controller. The root locus plot shows that the designed system
is stable.
0.22
0.965
100 0.99
800
0
-100
-200
700
600
500
400
100
0.99
1000
0.46
0.34
0.24
0.17
0.11
0.05
800
800
0.965
0.64
600
600
0.92
-300
-800
-700
0.84
-600
-500
0.74
-400
-300
0.6
0.42
-200
0.22
-100
400
400
0.86
200
200
Root Locus
1.5
x 10
-200
0.62
0.48
0.36
0.26
0.16
1.4e+004
0.08
1.2e+004
-400
400
600
0.64
0.78
1e+004
-800
8e+003
-1000
-600
800
0.46
0.5 0.94
-500
0.34
-400
0.24
-300
-200
1.5
2e+003
x 10
0
1
0.62
0.48
0.36
0.26
0.16
0.78
Imaginary Axis
8e+003
1e+004
0.62
-12000
0.48
-10000
-8000
0.36
-6000
0.26
0.16
-4000
1.2e+004
0.08
1.4e+004
-2000
-100
1.4e+004
0.08
1.2e+004
6e+003
0.5 0.94
6e+003
-1.5
-14000
1e+003
8e+003
4e+003
0.78
0.05
1e+004
2e+003
-1
0.11
4e+003
-0.5 0.94
0.17
Root Locus
6e+003
Imaginary Axis
200
0.86
-600
4e+003
2e+003
0
2e+003
4e+003
-0.5 0.94
Real Axis
6e+003
Fig. 4 Root Locus of the Inverter with the PI Controller
1e+004
0.78
0.62
Fig. 5 below shows the open loop bode diagram of the

system and Fig. 6 shows the closed loop bode diagram of the
system. From the open loop bode diagram, the Gain Margin
obtained is 17.5dB at a frequency of 9660rad/s and the Phase
Margin obtained is 53.6deg at a frequency of 2180rad/s.
Open Loop Bode Diagram
100
Magnitude (dB)
50
0
-1.5
-14000
-12000
-10000
-8000
0.36
-6000
0.26
0.16
-4000
-2000
Fig. 7 Root Locus of the Inverter with the PR Controller
Fig. 8 below shows the open loop bode diagram of the

system and Fig. 9 shows the closed loop bode diagram of the
system. From the open loop bode diagram, the Gain Margin
obtained is 16.1dB at a frequency of 9760rad/s and the Phase
Margin obtained is 53.2deg at a frequency of 2570rad/s.
-50
-100
Magnitude (dB)
50
-135
-180
-225
0
-50
-100
-150
-270
-200
0
-315
10
10
10
Frequency (rad/sec)
10
10
Phase (deg)
-360
1
10
Open Loop Bode Diagram
100
-200
-90
Phase (deg)
0.48
1.2e+004
0.08
1.4e+004
Real Axis
-150
Fig. 5 Open Loop Bode Diagram of the System with PI Control
-90
-180
-270
-360
1
10
Closed Loop Bode Diagram
20
10
10
10
Frequency (rad/sec)
10
10
Magnitude (dB)
Fig. 8 Open Loop Bode Diagram of the System with PR Control
-20
-40
-60
Magnitude (dB)
-100
45
0
-45
-20
-40
-60
-90
-80
-135
-100
45
10
10
10
Frequency (rad/sec)
10
10
Phase (deg)
-180
1
10
Closed Loop Bode Diagram
20
-80
Phase (deg)
8e+003
-1
Fig. 6 Closed Loop Bode Diagram of the System with PI Control
-90
-135
-180 1
10
B. PR Controller Design
The PR controller was designed for a resonant frequency 0
of 314.2rad/s (50Hz) and c was set to be 0.5rad/s, obtaining a
Kp of 5.1 and KI of 2073.15.
Fig. 7 below shows the root locus plot in Matlab of the
system including the LCL filter, the processing delay, anti-
-45
10
10
10
Frequency (rad/sec)
10
10
Fig. 9 Closed Loop Bode Diagram of the System with PR Control
223

V. SIMULATIONS
The 3kW Grid-Connected PV Inverter was modeled and
simulated in Simulink with PLECS blocksets, both in the sdomain and the z-domain.
Figs. 10 and 11 below show the grid voltage (Vgrid), the
inverter current (Iinv), the grid current (Igrid) and the reference
current (Iref) from the simulation using the PI controller and
from the simulation using the PR controller, respectively.
400
the PI and the PR controllers to compare the performance of

the two current controllers. The inverter was connected to the
grid using a variac to allow variation of the grid voltage for
testing purposes. The dc link voltage was obtained using a dc
power supply.
30
Iinv
Igrid
Iref
20
Vgrid
300
200
-100
Current (amps)
Voltage (volts)
10
100
-20
-300
-400
0.12
0.122
0.124
0.126
0.128
0.13
0.132
Time (sec)
0.134
0.136
0.138
-30
0.14
Fig. 12 3kW Grid-Connected PV Inverter Test Rig
Fig. 10 Grid Voltage, Inverter Current, Grid Current and Reference

Current from Simulation using the PI Controller
400
Figs. 13 and 14 below show the inverter output voltage, the

grid voltage and the grid current for a dc-link voltage of 300V,
a grid voltage of 150V and a preset value of 8A peak using the
PI controller and the PR controller, respectively.
30
Iinv
Igrid
Iref
20
Vgrid
300
200
100
0
-100
Current (amps)
10
Voltage (volts)
-10
-200
-10
-200
-20
-300
-400
0.12
0.122
0.124
0.126
0.128
0.13
0.132
Time (sec)
0.134
0.136
0.138
-30
0.14
Fig. 11 Grid Voltage, Inverter Current, Grid Current and Reference

Current from Simulation using the PR Controller
From the simulation results shown in Fig. 10 the PI current

controller has a considerable steady state error when following
the reference current, resulting in a difference of
approximately 3% between the reference current and the
inverter current. The steady state error is less for the PR
current controller, practically negligible, as can be seen in the
simulation results in Fig. 11. The small steady state error in
the inverter current when using the PR controller is due to the
use of a non-ideal PR controller, as this avoids controller
stability problems.
Fig. 13 Inverter Output Voltage, Grid Voltage and Grid Current with
a Preset Current of 8A Peak using the PI Controller
VI. GRID-CONNECTED PV INVERTER TESTING

The constructed 3kW Grid-Connected PV Inverter test rig is
shown in Fig. 12 below. It was operated at a switching
frequency of 10kHz and was connected to a 50Hz grid supply.
The inverter was controlled by the dsPIC30F4011
microcontroller from Microchip. The inverter was tested using
Fig. 14 Inverter Output Voltage, Grid Voltage and Grid Current with
a Preset Current of 8A Peak using the PR Controller
224

Figs. 15 and 16 show the grid current for the grid-connected

inverter with the PI current controller and with the PR current
controller, respectively. Ig is the grid current, Igr is the
reconstructed grid current up to its 13th harmonic (a
reconstruction of the grid current by adding the first 13 lower
harmonics) and Igfund is the fundamental component of the grid
current.
9
8
120
% Grid Current Amplitude
14
10
Ig
Igr
Igfund
12
10
100
5
4
90
80
2
1
70
0
0
60
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
50
40
30
20
Grid Current (A)
110
10
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Frequency (Hz)
2
0
-2
Fig. 17 Harmonic Spectrum of the Grid Current with PI Current

Control
-4
-6
-8
-10
10
9
-14
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
110
0.04
Time (sec)
7
6
100
90
14
% Grid Current Amplitude
Fig. 15 Grid Current with PI Current Control

Ig
Igr
Igfund
12
10
8
6
Grid Current (A)
-12
4
3
80
70
60
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
50
40
30
20
2
0
10
-2
0
0
-4
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Frequency (Hz)
-6
-8
Fig. 18 Harmonic Spectrum of the Grid Current with PR Current

Control
-10
-12
-14
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
Time (sec)
Fig. 16 Grid Current with PR Current Control
Figs. 17 and 18 show the harmonic spectrum of the grid

current with the PI current controller and with the PR current
controller, respectively. When the PI current controller was
used the fundamental component of the grid current reached
about 108.815% of the expected 8A peak, due to the steady
state error drawback of the controller. The 3rd, 5th and 7th
harmonics resulted about 8.252%, 4.771% and 2.728%,
respectively. When the PR current controller was used the
fundamental component of the grid current reached 100% of
the expected 8A peak. The 3rd, 5th and 7th harmonics reached
about 5.574%, 4.231% and 2.435%, respectively.
VII. COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

In the actual results obtained from the grid-connected
inverter there is a larger steady state error when using the PI
current controller than when using the PR current controller,
as was expected. This agrees with the results obtained in the
simulations.
When the inverter is controlled by the PI controller, with a
50Hz sinusoidal reference current of 8A peak, the resulting
fundamental inverter current peak is approximately 8.72A, as
shown in Fig. 15. This results in a percentage error of
approximately 9%. The difference in the percentage error
between the simulation result and the practical result is due to
non-idealness in the practical inverter when compared to the
ideal inverter modeled in the simulation.
When the inverter is controlled by the PR controller, for the
same sinusoidal reference current of 8A peak, the resulting
fundamental inverter current peak is 8A, as shown in Fig. 14.
This yields a 0% percentage error. Although a small error was
expected due to the fact that the non-ideal (damped) version of
the PR controller was used, it did not result in this case since
the value of c was kept very small at 0.5rad/s. And, thus the
resonant term gain, although reduced, it was still large enough
to follow the reference without problems. With the PR
controller there was no need for the grid voltage feed-forward
225

term to track the current reference.

When considering the 3rd, 5th and 7th harmonics resulted in
the grid current with the two types of current controllers,
although in this case the harmonics are less when using the PR
current controller, in both cases are higher than the limits
allowed by the standard regulations. The IEEE 929 and IEEE
1547 standards allow a limit of 4% for each harmonic from 3rd
to 9th and 2% for 11th to 15th [8], [9]. The IEC 61727 standard
specifies similar limits [10]. As can be observed from the
results, the 3rd and 5th harmonics with both current controllers
are outside the limits. These harmonics result from the inverter
itself due to the non-linearities in the inverter and also from
the grid supply.
These results demonstrate that although the PR controller is
superior to the PI controller when following a sinusoidal
reference, additional harmonic compensation is needed in both
cases to be compliant with the limits allowed by the standard
regulations.
[10] IEC 61727 2004 Standard Photovoltaic (PV) Systems Characteristics

of the Utility Interface.
VIII. CONCLUSION
This paper has presented a comparison between standard PI
and PR current controllers in Grid-Connected PV Inverters.
Results from simulations and experimental analysis of a 3kW
inverter connected to the 50Hz grid are shown. Both
simulation and experimental results show that a PI controller
with voltage feed-forward suffered from a steady state error
when following a sinusoidal reference. In the experimental
results obtained when using the PI controller there was an
error of approximately 9% in the grid current fundamental in
following the current reference. This error is reduced to zero
when using the PR controller. Regarding the 3rd, 5th and 7th
harmonics in the grid current, from the results obtained with
both controllers the 3rd and 5th harmonics were outside the
permissible limits. Thus although these results demonstrate the
superiority of the PR controller for applications requiring
sinusoidal references, additional harmonic compensation is
needed in both cases to conform to the standard regulations.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
R. Teodorescu, F. Blaabjerg, U. Borup, M. Liserre, A New Control

Structure for Grid-Connected LCL PV Inverters with Zero Steady-State
Error and Selective Harmonic Compensation, APEC04
Nineteenth
Annual IEEE Conference, California, 2004.
M. Liserre, R. Teodorescu, Z. Chen, Grid Converters and their Control
in Distributed Power Generation Systems, IECON 2005 Tutorial, 2005.
M. Ciobotaru, R. Teodorescu, F. Blaabjerg, Control of a Single-Phase
PV Inverter, EPE2005, Dresden, 2005.
V. Pradeep, A. Kolwalkar, R. Teichmann, Optimized Filter Design for
IEEE 519 Compliant Grid Connected Inverters, IICPE 2004, Mumbai,
India, 2004.
R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, P. Rodriguez, Grid Converters for
Photovoltaic and Wind Power Systems, Wiley, 2011.
D. N. Zmood, D. G. Holmes, Stationary Frame Current Regulation of
PWM Inverters with Zero Steady-State Error, IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, Vol. 18, No. 3, May 2003.
M. Liserre, F. Blaabjerg, S. Hansen, Design and Control of an LCLFilter Based Three Phase Active Rectifier, IEEE
Transactions on
Industry Applications, Vol 41, No. 5, Sept/Oct 2005.
IEEE 929 2000 Recommended Practice for Utility Interface of
Photovoltaic (PV) Systems.
IEEE 1547 Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with
Electric Power Systems.
226

Comparison Between PI and PR Current Controllers in Grid Connected PV Inverters PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Comparison Between PI and PR Current Controllers in Grid Connected PV Inverters PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology